Product Description

Until recently rescued by David McCullough, John Adams has always been overshadowed by Washington and Jefferson. Volatile, impulsive, irritable, and self-pitying, Adams seemed temperamentally unsuited for the presidency. Yet in many ways he was the perfect successor to Washington in terms of ability, experience, and popularity. Possessed of a far-ranging intelligence, Adams took office amid the birth of the government and multiple crises. Besides maintaining neutrality and regaining peace, his administration created the Department of the Navy, put the army on a surer footing, and left a solvent treasury. One of his shrewdest acts was surely the appointment of moderate Federalist John Marshall as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Though he was a Federalist, he sought to work outside the still-forming party system. In the end, this would be Adams's greatest failing and most useful lesson to later leaders.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #127773 in Books
• Published on: 2003-06-11
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 224 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9780805069372
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

From Publishers Weekly
Diggins pays tribute to David McCullough's reestablishment of John Adams's reputation, but he has his own take in this entry in the American Presidents series, edited by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. He seeks to rebut the conventional wisdom that the country's second president was a "loser," a view based on the fact after losing the election of 1800, Adams's party, the Federalists, disappeared from the scene. The 1800 election was, in fact, a triumph for Adams and the ideas the Federalists espoused, says CUNY historian Diggins (On Hallowed Ground), as an opposition party came to power "without America shedding a single drop of blood." Furthermore, Diggins asserts, "American political history begins with the rift between Adams and Jefferson," and though Adams has been disparaged by historians, he played a central role in the development of American democracy. More than just a miniature of our second president, Diggins's slim volume offers a reconsideration of Adams, a thoughtful study of American politics of the period and Adams's legacy for today.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Booklist
Repudiated by the electorate in 1800 and denigrated by historians ever since, the second president rose from the dead in David McCullough's blockbuster John Adams (2001). In this study, part of the publisher's accessible series on each of the country's chief executives, historian Diggins' academic specialty, intellectual history, influences his appraisal of Adams. The president wrote copiously about political philosophy, and in one chapter, Diggins closely evaluates the material. This is a wise confinement, for, except for his correspondence, Adams is a chore to read. The pace quickens in the balance of Diggins' narrative as he integrates Adams' fundamental ideas about politics into the hurly-burly story of the 1790s. Adams' presidency was, of course, vexed by the quasiwar with revolutionary France and associated turbulence in domestic politics. As much as recounting events, Diggins engages historians of this much-written-about decade, detecting pro-Jefferson bias in some, as he argues for Adams' significance as a political moralist. This examination will be of special interest to history readers with an analytical bent. Gilbert Taylor
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

About the Author
John Patrick Diggins is distinguished professor of history at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He is the author of numerous books, including On Hallowed Ground, The Proud Decades, The Lost Soul of American Politics, The Rise and Fall of the American Left, and Max Weber: Politics and the Spirit of Tragedy. He lives in New York City.

Customer Reviews

A fascinating discusion of Adam's thought and life
It hasn't been hard to notice that John Adams's reputation has been undergoing a serious rehabilitation in recent years. Joseph Ellis in particular has been dedicated to revising our understandings of both Adams and his nemesis/friend Thomas Jefferson. In his PASSIONATE SAGE: THE CHARACTER AND LEGACY OF JOHN ADAMS, FOUNDING BROTHERS: THE REVOLUTIONARY GENERATION, and AMERICAN SPHINX: THE CHARACTER OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, Ellis has been challenging a long established scenario in which the arch conservative John Adams was pitted against the populist liberal Thomas Jefferson for the political destiny of America, and the hero Jefferson triumphed over the mildly villainous Adams. Ellis has been questioning whether any part of this scenario makes any sense, whether Adams is at all a villain, and whether Jefferson is nearly as heroic. He has done this not by asserting the virtues of conservativism, but whether Adams has been correctly understood at all, both by his contemporaries and by subsequent generations. This reevaluation of Adams was continued by the spectacular and unanticipated mega-bestseller by David McCullough of 2001. This process of reassessment is clearly carried forward by John Patrick Diggins. For the record, I find the rehabilitation of Adams by these and other writers to be both welcome and highly convincing.

For two hundred years, our view of Adams came very much through the lenses of his critics and opponents. The truism that history is written from the standpoint of the victors is perhaps truer of Adams than any other major political figure in United States history. Adams was said to be a closet monarchist, a favorer of aristocracy. In the face of this criticism, Adams explicitly challenged Jefferson to point to a single passage in any of his writings that endorses monarchy or aristocracy. In fact, if one reads extensively in Adams works, as argued by Ellis, Diggins, and McCullough, one finds instead a powerful and subtle critique of the dangers of the development and influence of an economic elite, placing him at the opposite extreme of Alexander Hamilton, whose ideal of government came very close to the espousal of plutocracy. Adams did hope for the emergence of natural elites, but this was based on ability and character, not on wealth. Contained in the reassessment of Adams is implied a questioning of whether Adams is the arch conservative he is often portrayed as being. The case for Adams's conservativism is based largely on his belief in monarchism, his favoring aristocracy, his support for a bicameral Congress, his looking to the past for guidance, and his opposition to the French Revolution. As these authors have shown, Adams transparently did not favor monarchy or the growth of an aristocratic class and a bicameral legislature in the United States has not resulted in the Senate being a sort of House of Lords. Today many leftist historians have found grounds for critiquing the French Revolution, and a host of leftist political figures have found inspiration for their beliefs in the past (not least Karl Marx, who was a student of the Greeks and Romans). Furthermore, Adams was hardly a passionate capitalist, and was suspicious of a life devoted to the acquisition of wealth. In fact, if you compare Adams and Jefferson to that modern conservative icon Ronald Reagan, it is hard to find many issues that Adams would not differ sharply on from Reagan, while one can see a number of points of contact between Adams and Reagan. Diggins, in fact, finds numerous points of contact between Adams's political writings and many French radical writers of the late 20th century. I will say that as a leftist myself, I find much to love in Adams's thought. I share his fear of the negative effects that economic elites have on the democratic process, his belief in the need for a strong central government to protect citizens from the pernicious influence of greed (Adams would understand my fear of deregulation), and his instincts that government rather than less or no government is a better safeguard of individual liberty. Diggins rightly states that the American president who would most closely incarnate Adams's principles would be Teddy Roosevelt, who envisioned government as the means of breaking trusts and promoting economic justice.

Of all the books in the Schlesinger series on the American presidents, this is probably the one that I found most provocative intellectually. It is a dense, rich book, in large part because Diggins focuses more on the thought of Adams than his life. Diggins is more intent on explaining Adams ideas than the various events in his life. In one sense this is a weakness as a biography, but because his discussion of Adams's ideas is so clear and interesting, it more than makes up for the lack of biographical detail. I do regret some of the sketchiness of the biographical narrative. For instance, he doesn't' deal in any detail on how Adams became either vice president or president. This contrasts sharply with the rather deep discussion of Adams's ideas. This is in line with Diggins's role as apologist for Adams. On the purely historical side, most of Diggins's effort is put into dispelling the myth that the election of 1800 represented the defeat of Federalism by Republicanism (that's Jeffersonian Republicanism, not what we associate today with the GOP). I personally found this section less interesting that the sections dealing with Adams's thought.

I would strongly encourage anyone reading this volume to consider picking up the new volume THE PORTABLE JOHN ADAMS, edited by Diggins. I completely agree with Diggins that Adams's writings are more interesting than his presidency, and that he may be the most unjustly neglected political writer in American history. This new volume contains a wide ranging collection of his writings, not merely from his theoretical writings, but his diaries and letters as well.

Great short analytical "biography"
To start with and to avoid disappointment for those looking for something other than what this is, some of the trade reviews are just plain wrong: this is not a biography focusing on Adams childhood and youth. In fact, it isn't really a biography at all. What it is is a short, to the point but nevertheless fairly deep analysis of Adams' political thought with a particular emphasis on the politics of his presidential administration. It is written from a very positive view point (one shared by David McCullough) and from a view point that is quite hostile to Thomas Jefferson. As such it is an invaluable read for anyone interested in the development of presidential politics in America as well as anyone seeking the "rest of the story" regarding Adams, Jefferson, and their relationship.

A decent overview of his ideas, theories, and presidential policies.
This isn't much of a biography. It gives just a quick history of Mr. Adams early life. It mainly focuses on his political and philosophical career and his feuds with Jefferson and Hamilton. It does a good job of reviewing his term as second president and the policies and precedents he initiated. This book may be a stepping stone to a more comprehensive analysis of Mr. Adams's personal and political life.